[2021] KEELC 2992 (KLR)
The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without delay and that the appellant expressed readiness to provide security for the due performance of the decree. However, the court noted the absence of the judgment appealed against, making it difficult to assess the arguability of the appeal....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEELC 2992 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Parkway Investment Limited; Respondent: Dedan Kimathi University of Technology
- Court
- Environment and Land Court
- Court Station
- Environment and Land Court at Nairobi
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Environment and Land Appeal 6 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- conditional stay of execution granted
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Appeals Process, Lease Disputes, Security for Decree
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Parkway Investment Limited
Appellant
Dedan Kimathi University of Technology
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Stay Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant has satisfied the conditions for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
- 2 Whether the appellant will suffer substantial loss if stay is not granted.
- 3 Whether the application for stay was made without unreasonable delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application for stay of execution was made without delay and that the appellant expressed readiness to provide security for the due performance of the decree. However, the court noted the absence of the judgment appealed against, making it difficult to assess the arguability of the appeal. Nonetheless, considering the appellant's willingness to deposit the decretal sum and the circumstances of the case, the court exercised its discretion to grant a conditional stay of execution. The stay was granted on the condition that the appellant deposits the decretal sum of Kshs. 705,000 in an interest-earning joint account in the names of both parties' advocates within 30...
Court Disposition
conditional stay of execution granted
Orders
- Stay of execution of the order and decree issued on 7/2/2020 in Milimani Chief Magistrates Court Case No. 3812 of 2018 is granted on condition that the appellant deposits the decretal sum of Kshs. 705,000 in an interest-earning bank account to be opened in the joint names of the advocates for both parties within 30...
- Costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT AT NAIROBI
ELC APPEAL NO. 6 OF 2020
PARKWAY INVESTMENT LIMITED.............................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
DEDAN KIMATHI UNIVERSITYOF TECHNOLOGY............ RESPONDENT
RULING
The Appellant brought the application dated 18/2/2020 seeking stay of execution of the order and decree issued on 7/2/2020 in Milimani Chief Magistrates Court Case No. 3812 of 2018 pending hearing of the appeal it lodged against that decision. The Appellant averred that it applied for stay of execution when the judgement was delivered and was granted stay of execution for 30 days. It contended that its appeal would be rendered nugatory if execution proceeded and that it stood to suffer substantial loss.
The application was supported by the affidavit sworn by the Appellant’s Managing Director, Mr. Anthony Mwangi Ndungu, who deponed that the Appellant had an arguable appeal and stood to suffer substantial loss because the premises were not returned to their original state by the Respondent who it is claimed left the premises when it had rent arrears. He averred that the Appellant was prepared to give any security for the due performance of the decree that may be passed in the appeal. He produced copies of the memorandum of appeal, the letter requesting for proceedings together with correspondence exchanged in 2015 on the termination of the lease. The Respondent was a lessee at the Appellant’s premises in Union Towers, Nairobi. He annexed a copy of the lease over the suit premises which was in issue before the trial court.
The Respondent’s Principal Legal Officer, Nelius Wanjiru Mwangi, swore the Replying Affidavit in opposition to the application. She urged that the Appellant had failed to demonstrate that it had an arguable appeal or that it would suffer substantial loss for the court to grant the orders it seeks. The Respondent pointed out that the Appellant had failed to append a copy of the judgement it wishes to challenge on appeal.
The court has considered the application, replying affidavit and the submissions filed by the parties together with the authorities. The Appellant submitted that it had made the application for stay timeously. It argued that the Respondent was a public entity funded by the State and that it would be extremely difficult to recover funds from it if the Appellant succeeded on appeal. It added that there was no evidence to show the Respondent’s financial ability to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeds.
The Respondent submitted that the Appellant had not met the requirements for the grant of stay.
From what can be discerned from the application and response, the appeal arises from the judgement of the Learned Magistrate who dismissed the Appellant’s claim for damages for alleged breach of the lease dated 5/10/2011 by the Respondent in relation to the premises situated on the 10th Floor of the building known as Union Towers erected on land reference number 209/8523. The court allowed the Respondent’s counterclaim for a refund of the deposit it had paid of Kshs. 705,000/=.
For the court to grant an order for stay of execution unless it is satisfied that substantial loss may result unless the order is made, the application must be made without delay and the applicant must furnish security the court may order for the performance of whatever decree may ultimately be given. Without the benefit of seeing the judgement appealed against, it is difficult for this court to determine whether the intended appeal is arguable. The application was made without delay and the Appellant stated that it was prepared to give any security for the due performance of the decree that may be passed in the appeal.
The court grants the Appellant stay of execution on condition that it deposits the decretal sum of Kshs. 705,000/= in an interest earning bank account to be opened in the joint names of the advocates for both parties within 30 days of the date of this ruling. The costs of the application shall abide the outcome of the appeal.
DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 28TH DAY OF APRIL 2021.
K.BOR
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
Ms. Sharon Maina for the Appellant
Mr. V. Owuor- Court Assistant
No appearance for the Respondent